Role of cause and effect in politics

One of the most familiar words in the English language is "because", because events are generally ruled by the relationship between cause and effect. If there is a cause there must be an effect. This makes issues, trivial and important, understandable.

The effect may be obvious, but it is the cause that is the real story.

Strangely, in mass politics the sequence so often gets reversed. It is not the cause but the effect that is the real story. Effect often reshapes and fundamentally alters the starting point. Clearly, this proposition needs some explanation.

This column was written on Saturday, the eve of the declaration of results for the north Indian states of Bihar and Jharkhand Assembly elections.

What is the situation in Bihar, where Lalu Prasad Yadav has been in power for 15 years? Let us stick to the indisputable. Every political force, barring a section of the Left, has done everything in its power to defeat Lalu.

I say a section of the Left because the most important Leftist group in Bihar are the Naxalites and they were as determined to end Lalu Raj as anyone else.

The Janata Dal (United) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were natural opponents, so their mobilisation was on expected lines.

In all fairness, the cracks in the Delhi-centric United Progressive Alliance (UPA) were not unexpected. The logic that keeps partners together in Delhi does not extend to Patna.

If Delhi is the head, and therefore heady, then Patna is the base, and therefore basic. Ram Vilas Paswan cannot sustain his party by telling his followers that the doors of expansion are shut.

Neither can the Congress. And in Lalu Yadav's scheme of things, Paswan and the Congress were marginal factors.

They are necessary to ensure his victory, but unnecessary in the exercise of power. It was an ideal situation for him, and precisely for that reason could not be sustained. This was a primary cause for the scatter of the Delhi alliance in Bihar.

An equally important cause was that every political party overestimates its strength on the eve of an election. After all, elections are a human business. There cannot be precise markers. It is a fluid sum game. It is only in retrospect that the mind clears up.

If Lalu had felt that the arc of public opinion would steadily move away from him, he might have offered the 15 extra seats that would have kept the Congress by his side.

There was no way in which he could have retained the support of Paswan, since the bitterness between the two is personal. But, in broad terms, when it comes to an analysis of causes, everyone has a story to tell.

Using few epithets

Whether in victory or defeat Lalu is irrepressible. He has been using a few epithets about senior Congress leaders (apart from Sonia Gandhi) that will never be quoted in their authorised biographies.

There is only one realistic measurement of effect: when topsy and turvy have finished their game, who is in power?

No one is getting a majority from the people; power will go to those who can cobble one in the Assembly.

But Lalu's problem is that power has only one meaning for him: his wife becomes chief minister again. An ally as chief minister could be as problematic as an opponent in that chair, and a nominee from his own party perhaps the worst of all options.

This is a peculiarity of all personality-driven parties. In Lalu's case there is an added dimension of vengeance. He cannot afford to be out of power.

If Rabri Devi remains chief minister, Lalu will have a vested interest in the status quo. If the dice throws up different numbers, then the cracks at the base will turn heads in Delhi.

One nuance has already been established. Alliance in Delhi is no guarantee for a similar equation in the states. In Jharkhand, the Congress and Shibu Soren's JMM first nudged the third partner, Lalu, out. They then set about poaching from each other.

The aim was not merely to defeat the BJP-JD(U), but also to become the dominant partner of the alliance. This is an acknowledgement of the individual power of a chief minister.

This was why the Congress demanded and got the chief minister's chair in Maharashtra, although Sharad Pawar had the larger number of MLAs. The rules were changed because the Congress could use its Delhi muscle.

The Delhi muscle did not work in Chennai. DMK chief M. Karunanidhi took pre-emptive action when E.V.K.S. Elangovan, the Congress Union minister, dared to dream of his party's return to partial power in Tamil Nadu.

Point to note: If Lalu Yadav defeats his opponents and his friends, and dictates the shape of the next government, then what? That too will have its consequences in Delhi because he will demand a larger share of power in Delhi.

Could he extend his grasp on Ram Vilas Paswan's portfolio? Logic suggests that he could. There has been no reshuffle of the Manmohan Singh government since it was sworn in and these results could set the scene for a fresh check on equations.

When effect impacts on cause, there is but naturally an after-effect.

M.J. Akbar is the editor of The Asian Age